Re: OT: A Rare Voice of Sanity

John Oliver wrote:
On Wed, 09 Jul 2008 18:39:00 -0400, "Francis A. Miniter"
<faminiter@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

John Oliver wrote:
On Wed, 09 Jul 2008 09:41:12 -0400, "Francis A. Miniter"
<faminiter@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


Your argument leaves no room for "promoting the general welfare". Property rights trump every other principle in the Constitution. All bow down before property rights; they even crush human rights.
Francis A. Miniter
Property is owned by human beings. Those humans have rights. Property
rights are human rights.
--
John Oliver
jdoliver@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
AIM or MSN jdoliver98
Property rights are one kind of rights. The class of rights we commonly call "human rights" are more personal, and because they are more personal, they are generally regarded as being more important.

For instance, if you had to suffer the (a) unjust loss of your automobile; or (b) unjust loss of your health, which would be more important?


Francis A. Miniter

I use my car to get food, to go to my Doctor and to go to the
drugstore to get insulin and other medicines essential to my health.

The distinction you make is very artificial.

Have you ever heard of the Ukrainian famine of the 1930s? It was
caused by the Communists under Stalin seizing so many crops from the
peasant farmers that the farmers didn't have enough left to feed
themselves until the next crop.

Or how about the Red Guards under Mao breaking into homes and
destroying Ming dynasty vases.

Or Pol Pot driving people out of their homes?

I would suggest that the history of Communism demonstrates that
ignoring property rights is strongly connected to ignoring human
rights.
--
John Oliver
jdoliver@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
AIM or MSN jdoliver98

Ignoring property rights may be connected to ignoring human rights, but we are not discussing that. The issue, and the task of the US Supreme Court, has always been the balancing of these rights. Prior to 1937, property rights held sway and we had child labor problems, unsafe and unhealthy workplaces, racially discriminatory covenants in real property deeds, signs saying "No Irish Need Apply", and a host of selfish, mean and nasty ills visited on society by letting the worst of human nature have its sway.

No one here is arguing for communism, least of all Stalinism or Maoism (neither of which bore any similitude to communism as philosophically conceived), so don't bring up such stalking horses.


Francis A. Miniter
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: 30 days trial immune to set clock back in time?
    ... Tomer for attempting to protect his rights in the software he himself ... to still exert some sort of "property rights" in it actually infringes ... It's really pretty cut and dried, and nobody has trouble ...
    (comp.lang.java.programmer)
  • Re: Income from a tax on land.
    ... >> That's right, they aren't, because your land title is not a right at ... Oh, sure, legal rights, the same as the legal rights of a slave owner ... Deeds to slaves never designated them as "capital." ... Valid property rights rest on an act of production. ...
    (sci.econ)
  • Re: Arny insults all subjectivists
    ... seen the racial, gender, and sexual orientation bigots on usenet. ... rights over the rights of human beings. ... Property rights are a human right, an essential one, probably the most ... business owners include sexually harrassing employees. ...
    (rec.audio.opinion)
  • Re: OT: A Rare Voice of Sanity
    ... All bow down before property rights; ... even crush human rights. ... ignoring property rights is strongly connected to ignoring human ...
    (rec.arts.mystery)
  • Re: OT: A Rare Voice of Sanity
    ... John Oliver wrote: ... All bow down before property rights; they even crush human rights. ...
    (rec.arts.mystery)
Loading